ALLIANT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY / CSPP One Beach Street, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94133 415-955-2100 COURSE INFORMATION FORM Course Title: Court Consultation and Expert Witnessing Course Number: PSY8565 Units: 2 School: California School of Professional Psychology Term & Year: Fall 2009-2010 Day/Time: Monday 6:10 – 8:00 p.m. Room: TBD Instructor: Karen Franklin, Ph.D. Contact: mail@karenfranklin.com, (510) 232-1920 Office Hours: By appointment Grading: Letter grades Year Level: G-3
I. RATIONALE This course is part of the Forensic Family/Child Track program. It is designed for students whose career goals are to specialize in forensic and clinical work with children, adolescents, and their families. In this course, students will build upon knowledge and skills obtained in the first two years of the track. This course helps to fulfill the following program outcomes: • The ability to identify assessment tools appropriate to the clinical questions presented and to administer or arrange for the administration of an assessment battery tailored to these specific needs. (B.2.c) • The ability to understand the effects of race, class, culture and gender on assessment procedures and outcomes. (B.2.e) • The ability to apply research on psychopathology to clinical diagnosis and case formulation, taking into account the effects of race, class, culture and other social/cultural factors. (B.3.d-e) • The ability to read and critically review psychological literature, to synthesize and integrate research findings, and to pose theoretical, clinical or predictive questions and draw conclusions. (B.4.a,c) • The ability to critically assess the application of research findings to diverse ethnic and cultural groups. (B.4.e) • An understanding of the role of the psychologist in complex systems. (B.5.a) • The ability to recognize their own attitudes about age, gender and ethnically, culturally, sexually diverse, or handicapped populations and to understand concepts of power and privilege as they apply to interventions with these populations. (C.1) • The ability to understand clinical phenomenon within social and cultural context. (c.2) • The ability to recognize and describe an appropriate course of action for the legal and ethical issues associated with psychological practice. (E.1)
2 PSY8565 Course Information Form
II. COURSE DESCRIPTION, PURPOSE, LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT A. COURSE DESCRIPTION This is a Supervision/Consultation course required of third-year Forensic Family/Child Track students. It surveys common ethical, professional, and practical issues in contracting for and providing forensic psychology services. Topics include forensic data organizing, report writing, court testimony, applied research skills, and diagnosis and testing within the forensic context. It is assumed that students enter this class with some knowledge of basic forensic theory and practice. Students who wish to review or learn more about forensic topics are encouraged to do extra reading. The instructor is available for consultation in this regard. The primary emphasis in this course is on navigating an ethical path and not losing one’s moral bearing in these often-treacherous waters. A secondary emphasis is to assist students in developing their critical reading and thinking skills. Prerequisites: Completion of P540 or consent of instructor.
B. PURPOSE OF THE COURSE Upon completion of this overview course, students will have a basic understanding of the functions of psychologists as experts in legal matters, especially those pertaining to children and families. They will be aware of some of the common ethical and moral pitfalls facing psychologists who practice in legal contexts. This overview will help students decide how to tailor their further education, training, internships, postdoctoral training, and supervision so that they may later qualify to practice in the forensic specialty area(s) of their choosing.
C. LEARNING OUTCOMES Specifically, upon completion of the course, students should: 1. Have a greater understanding of psychologists’ role in the legal system, and an awareness of some of the common ethical and moral conflicts facing psychologists in this field. 2. Understand the social and cultural context of forensic psychology practice, including the dynamics of power, privilege, injustice, economic class, and race. 3. Know the procedure for formulating case hypotheses based on multiple sources of data, including interviews, psychological testing, records review, collateral interviews, and other sources. 4. Be able to identify assessment tools appropriate to specific forensic questions and to administer or arrange for the administration of an assessment battery tailored to these specific circumstances. 5. Realize the importance of critically assessing relevant research, and synthesizing and integrating reliable research findings into their forensic reports and court testimony. 6. Be able to recognize the limits of their own forensic and clinical competence and to identify appropriate referral resources and or case consultation resources when needed.
D. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY This course utilizes a combination of lecture, discussion, class exercises, films, and quizzes. Discussions focus on the assigned readings for each week, supplemented with in-class vignettes.
E. Class component on multicultural issues An understanding of how culture interacts with the law is absolutely essential to competence as a forensic psychologist. Issues of culture, race, economic class, power, and justice are an integral aspect of every topic in this course. The readings and lectures heavily focus on these issues. 3 PSY8565 Course Information Form F. DESCRIPTION OF COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT METHODS
Weekly readings and class participation Intellectual discussion is central to this small-group seminar course. Your main obligation is to read and critically evaluate the weekly readings and be prepared to participate in didactic discussion. You are encouraged to come to class with written questions or discussion prompts to help you better understand the readings or to stimulate class discussion. Your active participation in class discussions will demonstrate your mastery of the readings and of the broader objectives of the course. Participation will be evaluated based on the following criteria: • Preparation: You demonstrate that you have printed out and carefully read each required reading, you are familiar with its content, and you are prepared to discuss it in class; • Quality of contribution: You demonstrate an understanding of the readings, you are able to synthesize the ideas, explore and question the meanings, and apply the theoretical concepts to forensic cases; • Motivation: Your willingness to contribute to class discussion.
Quizzes We are all busy people, and it is easy to get behind in your reading. To ensure that this does not happen, I administer frequent unannounced quizzes at the outset of class. These quizzes are typically about five items long, and take about five minutes to complete. If you have carefully studied the assigned readings, you will do fine. If you have only skimmed the readings or if you have skipped them altogether, you will do poorly. The average reading per week is 45 pages, with a range of about 20 to 60 pages, so budget time accordingly. The quizzes are in substitution for a final exam, and make up a significant portion of your grade.
Attendance and punctuality Attendance is mandatory, and is reflected in your final grade. Class starts punctually at 6:10 p.m., and I expect you to be in your seat and ready to go by that time. We only have 110 minutes together each week, and we will use them all. There is no break in the middle of class. Missing two full classes will not be penalized, but each additional missed class will result in a 10-point deduction from your final grade. For this purpose, being more than 15 minutes late counts as an absence. Being 5-15 minutes late counts as a partially missed class, and will result in a 3-point deduction. (The first two partial misses will not result in a grade penalty if there are no full misses; the first partial miss will not result in a grade penalty if there is only one full miss.) If more than two classes are missed due to physical illness and/or religious holidays, there will be no grade penalties under the following conditions: (1) a physician verifies that the illness or medical condition precludes class attendance, and (2) the student notifies the instructor of the religious holidays at least one month in advance. Students with either of these approved absences are eligible to make up missed assignments. Other exceptions will be allowed at the discretion of the instructor, on the basis of extraordinary circumstances. Each student is responsible for all academic work missed during absences. Missing more than three classes (for any reason) will result in a grade of F or an "Incomplete". 4 PSY8565 Course Information Form
LEGAL OBSERVATION: Written and oral assignment
This assignment allows you to explore the real-world applications of the theoretical issues raised in this course. You will conduct an observational analysis of the functioning of your local courthouse. You will approach the observation from an anthropological or sociological stance, as if you are a cultural outsider, approaching the court as an embodiment of modern American legal culture. You are to spend a minimum of four hours observing court procedures. This can be broken up into two separate days. This four-hour requirement does not include any time in which you are waiting for proceedings to begin. In your paper, you will synthesize and analyze your observations. Reflect on the deeper meanings of what you saw. How do you expect that what you saw affected the participants, and the rest of society? How did your observations compare or contrast with what you learned in this course? What did you observe about cultural, socioeconomic, ethnic, and gender issues? What about justice or injustice? How did what you observed differ from any preconceived expectations you may have had? Extra-credit points accrue for briefly interviewing court participants to obtain their perspectives or clarify issues. You may conduct your observation at any of the main county courthouses (e.g., Alameda County Superior Courthouse in downtown Oakland; San Francisco Courthouse on Bryant Street, or Contra Costa County Superior Court in Martinez). You may select family court or criminal court. (Juvenile court is generally closed to the public, although past students have gotten permission to attend these interesting proceedings.) Call ahead to obtain information on when and where to attend. Be sure to complete and attach the data sheet listing the dates, times, courtrooms, and other required information about the proceedings you observed.
WRITTEN COMPONENT: The paper is a maximum of six pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman or equivalent, with one-inch margins. Please do not deviate from these formatting requirements. I enforce stringent writing standards. Poorly organized or poorly written papers will receive low grades. You will be penalized for errors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Quality writing includes clarity of wording, overall cohesion and smooth flow, conformity to formal academic grammar, consistent style, and attention to formatting details (e.g., paragraph indentation and location of page breaks). Write and edit your paper carefully for organization, clear language, correct spelling and punctuation, etc.Do not rely on spell-checking software as it misses many errors, such as incorrect word choices (e.g., effect vs. affect; than vs. then; it’s vs. its; which vs. that) and improper punctuation. Please be sure to fill out the "Legal Observation Data Sheet" and attach it to the front of your paper. Your grade on this assignment will be determined by: • The amount of time and effort put into the project • Adherence to assignment guidelines • The quality of your argument – your ability to summarize, synthesize, and critically analyze your observations • The technical quality of your writing (Errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation will cost points. Do not rely on your computer’s spell-check.) • Punctuality (Late papers will drop a half grade point per day.) ORAL COMPONENT: On an assigned date (see Weekly Schedule), students will share their observations and analyses with each other. Each student will present for a maximum of 10 minutes. Your grade will reflect how well you organize your presentation, articulate your thoughts, and present a well-grounded argument. 5 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Grading system Students will receive a letter grade (See the systemwide catalog for the university grade-point system and the Academic Standing Status for CSPP Doctoral Students CSPP for CSPP grading standards). Earning 90% of the total possible points for the course will result in an A grade, 80-90% will earn a B grade, and 70-80% is considered a "marginal pass" and will earn a C grade. Less than minimal competency will be reflected in grades of D/F.
Point Distribution Quizzes 35 points Written assignment 25 points Discussion participation 25 points Oral presentation 15 points Attendance: Strictly enforced (see p. 3)
Special note on plagiarism IGNORE THE FOLLOWING WARNING AT YOUR PERIL: I take active steps to prevent plagiarism, which is the passing off of other’s ideas or writings as one’s own. On average, I catch at least one student per year plagiarizing. Students who are caught plagiarizing are subject to strong sanctions, including a grade of "F" and referral to academic administrators. Plagiarism is considered scientific misconduct and may be grounds for dismissal from the university. Please do not do it. Cite your sources. See my online resources for how to avoid plagiarism.
III. COURSE READINGS Required readings There is no required text. The required readings are listed by week in the course schedule, and are available online via Moodle. Each week’s topic and readings are in a separate online folder. You are required to download and print the required readings and bring them with you to class. Supplemental background readings for each week are also listed.
Supplemental texts and background readings Barrett, K. H., & George, W. H. (2005). Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage. Ceci, S. J. & Hembrooke, H. (1998). Expert Witnesses in Child Abuse Cases: What Can and Should Be Said in Court. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Grisso, T. (1998). Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press. Grisso, T., Vincent, G., & Seagrave, D. (2005). Mental Health Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice. New York: Guilford Press. Janus, E. S. (2006). Failure to protect: America's sexual predator laws and the rise of the preventive state. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Heilbrun, K., Marczyk, G. R., & DeMatteo, D. (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook. New York: Oxford University Press. (ON LIBRARY RESERVE.) Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., & Lohr, J. M. (2003). Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology. New York: Guilford Press. 6 PSY8565 Course Information Form Melton, G. B. et al. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. Guilford. (ON LIBRARY RESERVE.) Monahan, J. (1980). Who is the Client? The Ethics of Psychological Intervention in the Criminal Justice System. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Rogers, R., & Shuman, D.W. (2005). Fundamentals of Forensic Practice: Mental Health and Criminal Law. New York: Springer Science. Tseng, Wen-Shing, Matthews, D., & Elwyn, T. (2004). Cultural Competence in Forensic Mental Health: A Guide for Psychiatrists, Psychologists, and Attorneys. New York: Brunner-Routledge. IV. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES : 1. Class attendance, lateness, missed exams or assignments: The University expects regular class attendance by all students. Students are responsible for all academic work missed during absences. See the University Catalog for the complete policy. Specific penalties for missed classes and tardiness are detailed elsewhere in this syllabus.
2. Responsibility to keep copies: It is good practice to keep copies of ALL major assignments that you turn in. On rare occasions, work may be lost because of computer failure or other mishaps. 3. Respectful speech and actions: Alliant University is committed to fair and respectful consideration of all members of our community, and the greater communities surrounding us. All members of the University must treat one another as they would wish to be treated themselves, with dignity and concern. As an institution of higher education, Alliant has the obligation to combat racism, sexism, heterosexism, and other forms of bias and to provide an equal educational opportunity. Professional codes of ethics and the Academic Code shall be the guiding principles in dealing with speech or actions that, when considered objectively, are abusive or insulting. 4. Academic Code of Conduct and Ethics: The University is committed to principles of scholastic honesty. Its members are expected to abide by ethical standards both in their conduct and in their exercise of responsibility towards other members of the community. Each student’s conduct is expected to be in accordance with the standards of the University. The complete Academic Code, which covers acts of misconduct including assistance during examination, fabrication of data, plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, and assisting other students in acts of misconduct, among others, may be found in the University Catalog. 5. Evaluation of students’ professional development and functioning: At CSPP, multiple aspects of students’ professional development and functioning (e.g., cognitive, emotional, psychological, interpersonal, technical, and ethical) are evaluated throughout the education and training process. Comprehensive evaluation is necessary in order for faculty, staff, and supervisors to appraise the professional development and competence of their students. See the University Catalog for the complete policy on Evaluation of Student Competence. 6. Disability accommodations request: If you need disability-related accommodations, please see me privately. All accommodations must be requested in a timely manner (at least 2 weeks in advance) with a letter of support from Alliant’s Office of Disability Services. For questions about accommodations, contact Disability Services.
7. Policy on course requirements during religious holidays: Alliant does not officially observe any religious holidays. However, in keeping with the institution’s commitment to issues of cultural diversity as well as humanitarian considerations, you will not be penalized for missing class due to a religious observance, provided that you have notified me in writing at least one month in advance.
8. Resources for obtaining tutoring or other student support services: I encourage students to take advantage of tutoring services if necessary. Contact the Director of Student Support Services for information.
9. Problem-solving resources: If problems arise with faculty, other students, staff, or student support services, students may contact the University Ombudsperson or use the University Problem Solving Procedures located on the web at http://www.alliant.edu/academic/studentproblemsolving/Student_Grievance _Policy.pdf.
7 PSY8565 Course Information Form PSY8565 Consulting: Expert Witnessing, Family/Child K. Franklin, Ph.D., Instructor WEEKLY COURSE SCHEDULE* PLEASE NOTE: The exact course content and schedule are subject to change. The most current syllabus and weekly assignments will be posted on Moodle. You are required to download and print out required readings and bring them with you to class each week. Week 1 Aug. 31 COURSE INTRODUCTION {Monday, September 7 : Labor Day – No Class} Week 2 Sept. 14 OVERVIEW OF FORENSIC PRACTICE Required readings: Faigman, D. & Monahan, J. (2009), Standards of legal admissibility and their implications for psychological science. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 1, pp. 3-25 McAuliff, B. & Groscup, J. (2009), Daubert and psychological science in court: Judging validity from the bench, bar, and jury box. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 2, pp. 26-52. Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 87-100 only (competence and qualifications; dual roles; confidentiality and informed consent) Supplementary (optional) readings: Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, February 2008 draft (available at: http://www.ap-ls.org/links/professionalsgfp.html). Griffith, E.E.H. (2005). Personal narrative and an African-American perspective on medical ethics. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 33, 371–381. Pruett, K. & Solnit, A. (1998). Psychological and ethical considerations in the preparation of the mental health professional as expert witness. In: S. Ceci & Helen Hembrooke (Eds.), Expert Witnesses in Child Abuse Cases (pp. 123-135). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. Chapters 3 - 5. (LIBRARY RESERVE.)
NOTE: The readings listed under each date must be completed by that date. 8 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Week 3 Sept. 21 BIAS IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY Required readings: Carter, R.T., & Forsyth, J.M. (2007). Examining Race and Culture in Psychology Journals: The Case of Forensic Psychology. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 38, 133-142. Barrett, K. & George, W. (2005), Judicial colorblindness, race neutrality, and modern racism: How psychologists can help the courts understand race matters. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 3, pp. 31-46. Barrett, K. & George, W. (2005), Case Examples: Addressing racism, discrimination, and cultural bias in the interface of psychology and law. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 2, pp. 19-30. Supplementary readings: Smith, P.K., Jostmann, N.B., Galinsky, A.D., & van Dijk, W.W. (2008). Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psychological Science, 19, 441-447. Week 4 Sept. 28 SCIENCE & PSEUDOSCIENCE Required readings: Koch, W., Nader, R., & Haring, M. (2009), The science and pseudoscience of assessing psychological injuries. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 12, pp. 263-283. Kocsis, R. (2009), Criminal profiling: Facts, fictions, and courtroom admissibility. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 11, pp. 245-262. McCann, J. T. & Ewing, C. P. (2006). The USS Iowa: Equivocating on death. In J. T. McCann & C. P. Ewing, Minds on Trial: Great Cases in Law and Psychology (pp. 129-139). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Supplementary readings: Tavris, C. (2003). The widening scientist-practitioner gap. In S. Lilienfeld, S. Lynn, & J. Lohr (Eds.), Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology (pp. ix-xviii). New York: Guilford Press. McCann, J. T., Shindler, K. L., & Hammond, T. R. (2003). The science and pseudoscience of expert testimony (pp. 77-108). In S. Lilienfeld, S. Lynn, & J. Lohr (Eds.), Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology New York: Guilford Press. Week 5 Oct. 5 FORENSIC DIAGNOSIS Required readings: Franklin, K. (2009, January/February), Diagnostic controversies in forensic psychology practice, California Psychologist, pp. 14-16. Franklin, K. (2009, July/August), Ethics corner: Diagnostic reification in court, California Psychologist, p. 27.
9 PSY8565 Course Information Form Greenberg, S., Shuman, D., & Meyer, R. (2004). Unmasking forensic diagnosis. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 27, 1-15. Vedantam, S. (2005, June 26). Patients’ diversity is often discounted. Washington Post. Vedantam, S. (2005, June 27). Social network’s healing power is borne out in poor nations. Washington Post, A1. Vedantam, S. (2005, June 28). Racial disparities found in pinpointing mental illness. Washington Post, A1. SAMPLE REPORT: Case of Victor Brown (multi-problem youth) Supplementary readings: Andreasen, N.C. (2007). DSM and the death of phenomenology in America: An example of unintended consequences. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 33, 108-112. Bland, R.C., Newman, S.C., & Orn, H. (1997). Age and remission of psychiatric disorders. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 42, 722- Ruocco, A. (2005). Reevaluating the distinction between Axis I and Axis II disorders: The case of borderline personality disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 1509-1523. Stevens, G.F. (1999). Applying the Diagnosis Antisocial Personality to Imprisoned Offenders: Looking for Hay in a Haystack. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 19, 1-26. Healy, D. Apr 15, 2006. The myth of 'mood stabilising' drugs. New Scientist. Nguyen, L., Huang, L.N., & Aganza, G.F. (2007). The Influence of Race and Ethnicity on Psychiatric Diagnoses and Clinical Characteristics of Children and Adolescents in Children's Services. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 18-25. Week 6 Oct. 12 FORENSIC ASSESSMENT & TESTING Required readings: Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 577-582 (initial consultations, data collection, preliminary report of findings) Tribe, R. (2005), Working with interpreters. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 11, pp. 163-176. Brodzinsky, D.M. (1993) On the use and misuse of psychological testing in child custody evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 213-219. Edens, J., Skeem, J., & Kennealy, P. (2009), The Psychopathy Checklist in the courtroom. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 8, pp. 175-201. SAMPLE REPORT: Case of Henry Golde (Asperger’s) Supplementary readings: Lally, S.J. (2003) What Tests Are Acceptable for Use in Forensic Evaluations? A Survey of Experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 491-498.
10 PSY8565 Course Information Form Week 7 Oct. 19 DATA ORGANIZING & REPORT WRITING Required readings: Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 582-586. Weiner, I. B. (1999). Writing forensic reports. In A. K. Hess & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Psychology(pp. 501-520). New York: John Wiley & Sons. NOTE: Read only pages 514-519. SAMPLE REPORT: Robert Storm (lead poisoning) Week 8 Oct. 26 TESTIFYING IN COURT Required readings: Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 586-605. Kennedy, W. A. (1986). The psychologist as expert witness. In W. Curran, A. McGarry, & S. Shah (Eds.), Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology(pp. 323-345). Philadelphia, PA F.A. Davis. NOTE: PAGES 334-345 ONLY. Mart, Eric (2006). "Testifying in Court and Depositions," in Getting Started in Forensic Psychology Practice, Chapter 7 (20 pp). Week 9 Nov. 2 ISSUES IN FAMILY FORENSICS Video: "Failure to Protect: The Taking of Logan Marr" (60 minutes) Required readings: O’Donohue, W., Beitz, K., & Tolle, L. (2009), Controversies in child custody evaluations. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 13, pp. 284-308. Franklin, K. (2003). Practice Opportunities with an Emerging Family Form: The Planned Lesbian and Gay Family. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3, 47-64. Benjet, C., Azar, S.T., & Kuersten-Hogan, R. (2003) Evaluating the parental fitness of psychiatrically diagnosed individuals: Advocating a functional-contextual analysis of parenting. Journal of Family Psychology , 17, 238-251. Supplementary readings: Oberlander, L. B. (1998). Termination of parental rights evaluation. In K. Heilbrun, G. R. Marczyk, & D. DeMatteo (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook (pp. 350-375). New York: Oxford University Press. CASE REPORT.
11 PSY8565 Course Information Form Miller, Monica & Jehle, Alayne (2006, Fall). Recent court rulings highlight inconsistencies in the rights and responsibilities of gay parents. American Psychology-Law Society News, 26 (3), pp. 1,5. Available online at: http://www.ap-ls.org/publications/newsletters/ aplsnews.fall2006.pdf Week 10 Nov. 9 JUVENILE DELINQUENCY Video: "Juvies" (66 minutes) Required readings: Grisso, T. (2005), Why we need mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice programs. In: Mental Health Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice, Chapter 1, pp. 3- 21. Poe-Yamagata, E. & Noya, M. (2005), Race disparities in the juvenile justice system. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 21, pp. 311-325. SAMPLE REPORT: Jasmine Morgan. Supplementary readings: Grisso, T. (1998), Preparing for evaluations in delinquency cases. In: Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles, Chapter 1, pp. 1- 35. Sampson, R.J., & Laub, J.H. (2003). Life-course desisters? Trajectories of crime among delinquent boys followed to age 70. Criminology, 41, 555 Bridges, G.S., & Steen, S. (1998). Racial disparities in official assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 63, 554-570. Graham, S., & Lowery, B.S. (2004). Priming Unconscious Racial Stereotypes About Adolescent Offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 483-504. Cornell, D. G. (2000). Juvenile commitment evaluation. In K. Heilbrun, G. R. Marczyk, & D. DeMatteo (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook (pp. 174-187). New York: Oxford University Press. CASE REPORT. Week 11 Nov. 16 CORRECTIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Video: America’s Brutal Prisons (48 min.) Required readings: Knoll, J. L. (2008). The recurrence of an illusion: The concept of ‘evil’ in forensic psychiatry. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 36, 105-116. Weinberger, L.E., & Sreenivasan, S. (1994). Ethical and professional conflicts in correctional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 161-167. Supplementary readings: Rhodes, Lorna, "Taxonomic anxieties: Axis I and Axis II in prison," Medical Anthropology Quarterly 14 (3): 346-373 (2000). Rhodes, L.A. (2007). Supermax as a Technology of Punishment. Social Research, 74, 547-566. Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms of moral disengagement. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind (pp. 161-191). New York: Cambridge University Press. Rhodes, L.A. (2005). Pathological Effects of the Supermaximum Prison. American Journal of
12 PSY8565 Course Information Form Public Health, 95, 1692-1695. Weinstein, H.C. (2002). Ethics issues in security hospitals. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 20, 443-461. Mayer, J. The Experiment. New Yorker Magazine. Monahan, J. (1980). Who is the Client? The Ethics of Psychological Intervention in the Criminal Justice System. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Week 12 Nov. 23 EMERGING CONTROVERSIES & CONCLUSIONS
* * * WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT DUE * * * Required readings: Petrila, John (2009), Finding common ground between scientific psychology and the law. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 17, pp. 387-407. Janus, E. S. (2004). Sexually violent predator laws: Psychiatry in service to a morally dubious enterprise. Lancet, 364, 50-52. Petrila, J. (2008). Because they do horrible things: Fear, science, and the erosion of civil liberties in sexually violent predator proceedings. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 36 (359-387). Gold, S., & Romney, L. (2007 November). Turmoil replaces treatment at Coalinga hospital: A state facility meant for sexually violent predators gets low marks after two years. Los Angeles Times. REPORT: Gerold Departey (SVP) Supplementary readings: Zander, T.K. (2005). Civil commitment without psychosis: The law's reliance on the weakest links in psychodiagnosis. Journal of Sex Offender Civil Commitment: Science and the Law, 1, 17-82. TOO LONG??? Berlin, F.S., Galbreath, N.W., & Geary, B. (2003). The Use of Actuarials at Civil Commitment Hearings to Predict the Likelihood of Future Sexual Violence. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 377-382. Rogers, Richard and Rebecca L. Jackson, "Sexually Violent Predators: The risky enterprise of risk assessment," Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & Law 33: 523-528 (2005). "Pariah". (2006). Sexual Fascism in Progressive America: Scapegoats and Shunning. CounterPunch. Franklin, K. (2007). Invasion of the hebephile hunters: Or, the story of how an archaic word got a new lease on life. Available online at: http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/search?q=hebephilia Week 13 November 30 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS Week 14 Dec. 7 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS Week 15 Dec. 14 TBA 13 PSY8565 Course Information Form
LEGAL OBSERVATION DATA SHEET Attach as face sheet to typewritten assignment __ Name Date(s) of observation Times of observation Courthouse Courtroom(s) Name(s) of judge(s) Extra-credit interviews Types of proceedings observed
Other data
ALLIANT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY / CSPP
One Beach Street, Suite 100
San Francisco, CA 94133
415-955-2100
COURSE INFORMATION FORM
Course Title: Court Consultation and Expert Witnessing
Course Number: PSY8565
Units: 2
School: California School of Professional Psychology
Term & Year: Fall 2009-2010
Day/Time: Monday 6:10 – 8:00 p.m.
Room: TBD
Instructor: Karen Franklin, Ph.D.
Contact: mail@karenfranklin.com, (510) 232-1920
Office Hours: By appointment
Grading: Letter grades
Year Level: G-3
I. RATIONALE
This course is part of the Forensic Family/Child Track program. It is designed for students whose career goals are to specialize in forensic and clinical work with children, adolescents, and their families. In this course, students will build upon knowledge and skills obtained in the first two years of the track. This course helps to fulfill the following program outcomes:
• The ability to identify assessment tools appropriate to the clinical questions presented and to administer or arrange for the administration of an assessment battery tailored to these specific needs. (B.2.c)
• The ability to understand the effects of race, class, culture and gender on assessment procedures and outcomes. (B.2.e)
• The ability to apply research on psychopathology to clinical diagnosis and case formulation, taking into account the effects of race, class, culture and other social/cultural factors. (B.3.d-e)
• The ability to read and critically review psychological literature, to synthesize and integrate research findings, and to pose theoretical, clinical or predictive questions and draw conclusions. (B.4.a,c)
• The ability to critically assess the application of research findings to diverse ethnic and cultural groups. (B.4.e)
• An understanding of the role of the psychologist in complex systems. (B.5.a)
• The ability to recognize their own attitudes about age, gender and ethnically, culturally, sexually diverse, or handicapped populations and to understand concepts of power and privilege as they apply to interventions with these populations. (C.1)
• The ability to understand clinical phenomenon within social and cultural context. (c.2)
• The ability to recognize and describe an appropriate course of action for the legal and ethical issues associated with psychological practice. (E.1)
2 PSY8565 Course Information Form
II. COURSE DESCRIPTION, PURPOSE, LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT
A. COURSE DESCRIPTION
This is a Supervision/Consultation course required of third-year Forensic Family/Child Track students. It surveys common ethical, professional, and practical issues in contracting for and providing forensic psychology services. Topics include forensic data organizing, report writing, court testimony, applied research skills, and diagnosis and testing within the forensic context. It is assumed that students enter this class with some knowledge of basic forensic theory and practice. Students who wish to review or learn more about forensic topics are encouraged to do extra reading. The instructor is available for consultation in this regard. The primary emphasis in this course is on navigating an ethical path and not losing one’s moral bearing in these often-treacherous waters. A secondary emphasis is to assist students in developing their critical reading and thinking skills. Prerequisites: Completion of P540 or consent of instructor.
B. PURPOSE OF THE COURSE
Upon completion of this overview course, students will have a basic understanding of the functions of psychologists as experts in legal matters, especially those pertaining to children and families. They will be aware of some of the common ethical and moral pitfalls facing psychologists who practice in legal contexts. This overview will help students decide how to tailor their further education, training, internships, postdoctoral training, and supervision so that they may later qualify to practice in the forensic specialty area(s) of their choosing.
C. LEARNING OUTCOMES
Specifically, upon completion of the course, students should:
1. Have a greater understanding of psychologists’ role in the legal system, and an awareness of some of the common ethical and moral conflicts facing psychologists in this field.
2. Understand the social and cultural context of forensic psychology practice, including the dynamics of power, privilege, injustice, economic class, and race.
3. Know the procedure for formulating case hypotheses based on multiple sources of data, including interviews, psychological testing, records review, collateral interviews, and other sources.
4. Be able to identify assessment tools appropriate to specific forensic questions and to administer or arrange for the administration of an assessment battery tailored to these specific circumstances.
5. Realize the importance of critically assessing relevant research, and synthesizing and integrating reliable research findings into their forensic reports and court testimony.
6. Be able to recognize the limits of their own forensic and clinical competence and to identify appropriate referral resources and or case consultation resources when needed.
D. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY
This course utilizes a combination of lecture, discussion, class exercises, films, and quizzes. Discussions focus on the assigned readings for each week, supplemented with in-class vignettes.
E. Class component on multicultural issues
An understanding of how culture interacts with the law is absolutely essential to competence as a forensic psychologist. Issues of culture, race, economic class, power, and justice are an integral aspect of every topic in this course. The readings and lectures heavily focus on these issues. 3 PSY8565 Course Information Form
F. DESCRIPTION OF COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT METHODS
Weekly readings and class participation
Intellectual discussion is central to this small-group seminar course. Your main obligation is to read and critically evaluate the weekly readings and be prepared to participate in didactic discussion. You are encouraged to come to class with written questions or discussion prompts to help you better understand the readings or to stimulate class discussion. Your active participation in class discussions will demonstrate your mastery of the readings and of the broader objectives of the course. Participation will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
• Preparation: You demonstrate that you have printed out and carefully read each required reading, you are familiar with its content, and you are prepared to discuss it in class;
• Quality of contribution: You demonstrate an understanding of the readings, you are able to synthesize the ideas, explore and question the meanings, and apply the theoretical concepts to forensic cases;
• Motivation: Your willingness to contribute to class discussion.
Quizzes
We are all busy people, and it is easy to get behind in your reading. To ensure that this does not happen, I administer frequent unannounced quizzes at the outset of class. These quizzes are typically about five items long, and take about five minutes to complete. If you have carefully studied the assigned readings, you will do fine. If you have only skimmed the readings or if you have skipped them altogether, you will do poorly. The average reading per week is 45 pages, with a range of about 20 to 60 pages, so budget time accordingly. The quizzes are in substitution for a final exam, and make up a significant portion of your grade.
Attendance and punctuality
Attendance is mandatory, and is reflected in your final grade. Class starts punctually at 6:10 p.m., and I expect you to be in your seat and ready to go by that time. We only have 110 minutes together each week, and we will use them all. There is no break in the middle of class.
Missing two full classes will not be penalized, but each additional missed class will result in a 10-point deduction from your final grade. For this purpose, being more than 15 minutes late counts as an absence. Being 5-15 minutes late counts as a partially missed class, and will result in a 3-point deduction. (The first two partial misses will not result in a grade penalty if there are no full misses; the first partial miss will not result in a grade penalty if there is only one full miss.) If more than two classes are missed due to physical illness and/or religious holidays, there will be no grade penalties under the following conditions: (1) a physician verifies that the illness or medical condition precludes class attendance, and (2) the student notifies the instructor of the religious holidays at least one month in advance. Students with either of these approved absences are eligible to make up missed assignments. Other exceptions will be allowed at the discretion of the instructor, on the basis of extraordinary circumstances. Each student is responsible for all academic work missed during absences. Missing more than three classes (for any reason) will result in a grade of F or an "Incomplete". 4 PSY8565 Course Information Form
LEGAL OBSERVATION: Written and oral assignment
This assignment allows you to explore the real-world applications of the theoretical issues raised in this course. You will conduct an observational analysis of the functioning of your local courthouse. You will approach the observation from an anthropological or sociological stance, as if you are a cultural outsider, approaching the court as an embodiment of modern American legal culture. You are to spend a minimum of four hours observing court procedures. This can be broken up into two separate days. This four-hour requirement does not include any time in which you are waiting for proceedings to begin. In your paper, you will synthesize and analyze your observations. Reflect on the deeper meanings of what you saw. How do you expect that what you saw affected the participants, and the rest of society? How did your observations compare or contrast with what you learned in this course? What did you observe about cultural, socioeconomic, ethnic, and gender issues? What about justice or injustice? How did what you observed differ from any preconceived expectations you may have had? Extra-credit points accrue for briefly interviewing court participants to obtain their perspectives or clarify issues.
You may conduct your observation at any of the main county courthouses (e.g., Alameda County Superior Courthouse in downtown Oakland; San Francisco Courthouse on Bryant Street, or Contra Costa County Superior Court in Martinez). You may select family court or criminal court. (Juvenile court is generally closed to the public, although past students have gotten permission to attend these interesting proceedings.) Call ahead to obtain information on when and where to attend. Be sure to complete and attach the data sheet listing the dates, times, courtrooms, and other required information about the proceedings you observed.
WRITTEN COMPONENT: The paper is a maximum of six pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman or equivalent, with one-inch margins. Please do not deviate from these formatting requirements. I enforce stringent writing standards. Poorly organized or poorly written papers will receive low grades. You will be penalized for errors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Quality writing includes clarity of wording, overall cohesion and smooth flow, conformity to formal academic grammar, consistent style, and attention to formatting details (e.g., paragraph indentation and location of page breaks). Write and edit your paper carefully for organization, clear language, correct spelling and punctuation, etc. Do not rely on spell-checking software as it misses many errors, such as incorrect word choices (e.g., effect vs. affect; than vs. then; it’s vs. its; which vs. that) and improper punctuation. Please be sure to fill out the "Legal Observation Data Sheet" and attach it to the front of your paper.
Your grade on this assignment will be determined by:
• The amount of time and effort put into the project
• Adherence to assignment guidelines
• The quality of your argument – your ability to summarize, synthesize, and critically analyze your observations
• The technical quality of your writing (Errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation will cost points. Do not rely on your computer’s spell-check.)
• Punctuality (Late papers will drop a half grade point per day.)
ORAL COMPONENT: On an assigned date (see Weekly Schedule), students will share their observations and analyses with each other. Each student will present for a maximum of 10 minutes. Your grade will reflect how well you organize your presentation, articulate your thoughts, and present a well-grounded argument. 5 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Grading system
Students will receive a letter grade (See the systemwide catalog for the university grade-point system and the Academic Standing Status for CSPP Doctoral Students CSPP for CSPP grading standards). Earning 90% of the total possible points for the course will result in an A grade, 80-90% will earn a B grade, and 70-80% is considered a "marginal pass" and will earn a C grade. Less than minimal competency will be reflected in grades of D/F.
Point Distribution
Quizzes 35 points Written assignment 25 points
Discussion participation 25 points Oral presentation 15 points
Attendance: Strictly enforced (see p. 3)
Special note on plagiarism
IGNORE THE FOLLOWING WARNING AT YOUR PERIL: I take active steps to prevent plagiarism, which is the passing off of other’s ideas or writings as one’s own. On average, I catch at least one student per year plagiarizing. Students who are caught plagiarizing are subject to strong sanctions, including a grade of "F" and referral to academic administrators. Plagiarism is considered scientific misconduct and may be grounds for dismissal from the university. Please do not do it. Cite your sources. See my online resources for how to avoid plagiarism.
III. COURSE READINGS
Required readings
There is no required text. The required readings are listed by week in the course schedule, and are available online via Moodle. Each week’s topic and readings are in a separate online folder. You are required to download and print the required readings and bring them with you to class. Supplemental background readings for each week are also listed.
Supplemental texts and background readings
Barrett, K. H., & George, W. H. (2005). Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ceci, S. J. & Hembrooke, H. (1998). Expert Witnesses in Child Abuse Cases: What Can and Should Be Said in Court. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Grisso, T. (1998). Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
Grisso, T., Vincent, G., & Seagrave, D. (2005). Mental Health Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice. New York: Guilford Press.
Janus, E. S. (2006). Failure to protect: America's sexual predator laws and the rise of the preventive state. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Heilbrun, K., Marczyk, G. R., & DeMatteo, D. (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook. New York: Oxford University Press. (ON LIBRARY RESERVE.)
Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., & Lohr, J. M. (2003). Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology. New York: Guilford Press. 6 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Melton, G. B. et al. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. Guilford. (ON LIBRARY RESERVE.)
Monahan, J. (1980). Who is the Client? The Ethics of Psychological Intervention in the Criminal Justice System. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Rogers, R., & Shuman, D.W. (2005). Fundamentals of Forensic Practice: Mental Health and Criminal Law. New York: Springer Science.
Tseng, Wen-Shing, Matthews, D., & Elwyn, T. (2004). Cultural Competence in Forensic Mental Health: A Guide for Psychiatrists, Psychologists, and Attorneys. New York: Brunner-Routledge.
IV. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
:
1. Class attendance, lateness, missed exams or assignments: The University expects regular class attendance by all students. Students are responsible for all academic work missed during absences. See the University Catalog for the complete policy. Specific penalties for missed classes and tardiness are detailed elsewhere in this syllabus.
2. Responsibility to keep copies: It is good practice to keep copies of ALL major assignments that you turn in. On rare occasions, work may be lost because of computer failure or other mishaps.
3. Respectful speech and actions: Alliant University is committed to fair and respectful consideration of all members of our community, and the greater communities surrounding us. All members of the University must treat one another as they would wish to be treated themselves, with dignity and concern. As an institution of higher education, Alliant has the obligation to combat racism, sexism, heterosexism, and other forms of bias and to provide an equal educational opportunity. Professional codes of ethics and the Academic Code shall be the guiding principles in dealing with speech or actions that, when considered objectively, are abusive or insulting.
4. Academic Code of Conduct and Ethics: The University is committed to principles of scholastic honesty. Its members are expected to abide by ethical standards both in their conduct and in their exercise of responsibility towards other members of the community. Each student’s conduct is expected to be in accordance with the standards of the University.
The complete Academic Code, which covers acts of misconduct including assistance during examination, fabrication of data, plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, and assisting other students in acts of misconduct, among others, may be found in the University Catalog.
5. Evaluation of students’ professional development and functioning: At CSPP, multiple aspects of students’ professional development and functioning (e.g., cognitive, emotional, psychological, interpersonal, technical, and ethical) are evaluated throughout the education and training process. Comprehensive evaluation is necessary in order for faculty, staff, and supervisors to appraise the professional development and competence of their students. See the University Catalog for the complete policy on Evaluation of Student Competence.
6. Disability accommodations request: If you need disability-related accommodations, please see me privately. All accommodations must be requested in a timely manner (at least 2 weeks in advance) with a letter of support from Alliant’s Office of Disability Services. For questions about accommodations, contact Disability Services.
7. Policy on course requirements during religious holidays: Alliant does not officially observe any religious holidays. However, in keeping with the institution’s commitment to issues of cultural diversity as well as humanitarian considerations, you will not be penalized for missing class due to a religious observance, provided that you have notified me in writing at least one month in advance.
8. Resources for obtaining tutoring or other student support services: I encourage students to take advantage of tutoring services if necessary. Contact the Director of Student Support Services for information.
9.
Problem-solving resources: If problems arise with faculty, other students, staff, or student support services, students may contact the University Ombudsperson or use the University Problem Solving Procedures located on the web at http://www.alliant.edu/academic/studentproblemsolving/Student_Grievance _Policy.pdf.
7 PSY8565 Course Information Form
PSY8565
Consulting: Expert Witnessing, Family/Child
K. Franklin, Ph.D., Instructor
WEEKLY COURSE SCHEDULE*
PLEASE NOTE: The exact course content and schedule are subject to change. The most current syllabus and weekly assignments will be posted on Moodle. You are required to download and print out required readings and bring them with you to class each week.
Week 1 Aug. 31 COURSE INTRODUCTION
{Monday, September 7 : Labor Day – No Class}
Week 2 Sept. 14 OVERVIEW OF FORENSIC PRACTICE
Required readings:
Faigman, D. & Monahan, J. (2009), Standards of legal admissibility and their implications for psychological science. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 1, pp. 3-25
McAuliff, B. & Groscup, J. (2009), Daubert and psychological science in court: Judging validity from the bench, bar, and jury box. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 2, pp. 26-52.
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 87-100 only (competence and qualifications; dual roles; confidentiality and informed consent)
Supplementary (optional) readings:
Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, February 2008 draft (available at: http://www.ap-ls.org/links/professionalsgfp.html).
Griffith, E.E.H. (2005). Personal narrative and an African-American perspective on medical ethics. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 33, 371–381.
Pruett, K. & Solnit, A. (1998). Psychological and ethical considerations in the preparation of the mental health professional as expert witness. In: S. Ceci & Helen Hembrooke (Eds.), Expert Witnesses in Child Abuse Cases (pp. 123-135). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. Chapters 3 - 5. (LIBRARY RESERVE.)
Week 3 Sept. 21 BIAS IN FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY
Required readings:
Carter, R.T., & Forsyth, J.M. (2007). Examining Race and Culture in Psychology Journals: The Case of Forensic Psychology. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 38, 133-142.
Barrett, K. & George, W. (2005), Judicial colorblindness, race neutrality, and modern racism: How psychologists can help the courts understand race matters. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 3, pp. 31-46.
Barrett, K. & George, W. (2005), Case Examples: Addressing racism, discrimination, and cultural bias in the interface of psychology and law. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 2, pp. 19-30.
Supplementary readings:
Smith, P.K., Jostmann, N.B., Galinsky, A.D., & van Dijk, W.W. (2008). Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psychological Science, 19, 441-447.
Week 4 Sept. 28 SCIENCE & PSEUDOSCIENCE
Required readings:
Koch, W., Nader, R., & Haring, M. (2009), The science and pseudoscience of assessing psychological injuries. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 12, pp. 263-283.
Kocsis, R. (2009), Criminal profiling: Facts, fictions, and courtroom admissibility. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 11, pp. 245-262.
McCann, J. T. & Ewing, C. P. (2006). The USS Iowa: Equivocating on death. In J. T. McCann & C. P. Ewing, Minds on Trial: Great Cases in Law and Psychology (pp. 129-139). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Supplementary readings:
Tavris, C. (2003). The widening scientist-practitioner gap. In S. Lilienfeld, S. Lynn, & J. Lohr (Eds.), Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology (pp. ix-xviii). New York: Guilford Press.
McCann, J. T., Shindler, K. L., & Hammond, T. R. (2003). The science and pseudoscience of expert testimony (pp. 77-108). In S. Lilienfeld, S. Lynn, & J. Lohr (Eds.), Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology New York: Guilford Press.
Week 5 Oct. 5 FORENSIC DIAGNOSIS
Required readings:
Franklin, K. (2009, January/February), Diagnostic controversies in forensic psychology practice, California Psychologist, pp. 14-16.
Franklin, K. (2009, July/August), Ethics corner: Diagnostic reification in court, California Psychologist, p. 27.
9 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Greenberg, S., Shuman, D., & Meyer, R. (2004). Unmasking forensic diagnosis. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 27, 1-15.
Vedantam, S. (2005, June 26). Patients’ diversity is often discounted. Washington Post.
Vedantam, S. (2005, June 27). Social network’s healing power is borne out in poor nations. Washington Post, A1.
Vedantam, S. (2005, June 28). Racial disparities found in pinpointing mental illness. Washington Post, A1.
SAMPLE REPORT: Case of Victor Brown (multi-problem youth)
Supplementary readings:
Andreasen, N.C. (2007). DSM and the death of phenomenology in America: An example of unintended consequences. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 33, 108-112.
Bland, R.C., Newman, S.C., & Orn, H. (1997). Age and remission of psychiatric disorders. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 42, 722-
Ruocco, A. (2005). Reevaluating the distinction between Axis I and Axis II disorders: The case of borderline personality disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 1509-1523.
Stevens, G.F. (1999). Applying the Diagnosis Antisocial Personality to Imprisoned Offenders: Looking for Hay in a Haystack. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 19, 1-26.
Healy, D. Apr 15, 2006. The myth of 'mood stabilising' drugs. New Scientist.
Nguyen, L., Huang, L.N., & Aganza, G.F. (2007). The Influence of Race and Ethnicity on Psychiatric Diagnoses and Clinical Characteristics of Children and Adolescents in Children's Services. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 18-25.
Week 6 Oct. 12 FORENSIC ASSESSMENT & TESTING
Required readings:
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 577-582 (initial consultations, data collection, preliminary report of findings)
Tribe, R. (2005), Working with interpreters. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 11, pp. 163-176.
Brodzinsky, D.M. (1993) On the use and misuse of psychological testing in child custody evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 213-219.
Edens, J., Skeem, J., & Kennealy, P. (2009), The Psychopathy Checklist in the courtroom. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 8, pp. 175-201.
SAMPLE REPORT: Case of Henry Golde (Asperger’s)
Supplementary readings:
Lally, S.J. (2003) What Tests Are Acceptable for Use in Forensic Evaluations? A Survey of Experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 491-498.
10 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Week 7 Oct. 19 DATA ORGANIZING & REPORT WRITING
Required readings:
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 582-586.
Weiner, I. B. (1999). Writing forensic reports. In A. K. Hess & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Psychology (pp. 501-520). New York: John Wiley & Sons. NOTE: Read only pages 514-519.
SAMPLE REPORT: Robert Storm (lead poisoning)
Week 8 Oct. 26 TESTIFYING IN COURT
Required readings:
Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 586-605.
Kennedy, W. A. (1986). The psychologist as expert witness. In W. Curran, A. McGarry, & S. Shah (Eds.), Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology (pp. 323-345). Philadelphia, PA F.A. Davis. NOTE: PAGES 334-345 ONLY.
Mart, Eric (2006). "Testifying in Court and Depositions," in Getting Started in Forensic Psychology Practice, Chapter 7 (20 pp).
Week 9 Nov. 2 ISSUES IN FAMILY FORENSICS
Video: "Failure to Protect: The Taking of Logan Marr" (60 minutes)
Required readings:
O’Donohue, W., Beitz, K., & Tolle, L. (2009), Controversies in child custody evaluations. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 13, pp. 284-308.
Franklin, K. (2003). Practice Opportunities with an Emerging Family Form: The Planned Lesbian and Gay Family. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3, 47-64.
Benjet, C., Azar, S.T., & Kuersten-Hogan, R. (2003) Evaluating the parental fitness of psychiatrically diagnosed individuals: Advocating a functional-contextual analysis of parenting. Journal of Family Psychology , 17, 238-251.
Supplementary readings:
Oberlander, L. B. (1998). Termination of parental rights evaluation. In K. Heilbrun, G. R. Marczyk, & D. DeMatteo (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook (pp. 350-375). New York: Oxford University Press. CASE REPORT.
11 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Miller, Monica & Jehle, Alayne (2006, Fall). Recent court rulings highlight inconsistencies in the rights and responsibilities of gay parents. American Psychology-Law Society News, 26 (3), pp. 1,5. Available online at: http://www.ap-ls.org/publications/newsletters/ aplsnews.fall2006.pdf
Week 10 Nov. 9 JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
Video: "Juvies" (66 minutes)
Required readings:
Grisso, T. (2005), Why we need mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice programs. In: Mental Health Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice, Chapter 1, pp. 3- 21.
Poe-Yamagata, E. & Noya, M. (2005), Race disparities in the juvenile justice system. In: Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, Chapter 21, pp. 311-325.
SAMPLE REPORT: Jasmine Morgan.
Supplementary readings:
Grisso, T. (1998), Preparing for evaluations in delinquency cases. In: Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles, Chapter 1, pp. 1- 35.
Sampson, R.J., & Laub, J.H. (2003). Life-course desisters? Trajectories of crime among delinquent boys followed to age 70. Criminology, 41, 555
Bridges, G.S., & Steen, S. (1998). Racial disparities in official assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 63, 554-570.
Graham, S., & Lowery, B.S. (2004). Priming Unconscious Racial Stereotypes About Adolescent Offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 483-504.
Cornell, D. G. (2000). Juvenile commitment evaluation. In K. Heilbrun, G. R. Marczyk, & D. DeMatteo (2002), Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook (pp. 174-187). New York: Oxford University Press. CASE REPORT.
Week 11 Nov. 16 CORRECTIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
Video: America’s Brutal Prisons (48 min.)
Required readings:
Knoll, J. L. (2008). The recurrence of an illusion: The concept of ‘evil’ in forensic psychiatry. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 36, 105-116.
Weinberger, L.E., & Sreenivasan, S. (1994). Ethical and professional conflicts in correctional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 161-167.
Supplementary readings:
Rhodes, Lorna, "Taxonomic anxieties: Axis I and Axis II in prison," Medical Anthropology Quarterly 14 (3): 346-373 (2000).
Rhodes, L.A. (2007). Supermax as a Technology of Punishment. Social Research, 74, 547-566.
Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms of moral disengagement. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind (pp. 161-191). New York: Cambridge University Press. Rhodes, L.A. (2005). Pathological Effects of the Supermaximum Prison. American Journal of
12 PSY8565 Course Information Form
Public Health, 95,
1692-1695.
Weinstein, H.C. (2002). Ethics issues in security hospitals. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 20, 443-461.
Mayer, J. The Experiment. New Yorker Magazine.
Monahan, J. (1980). Who is the Client? The Ethics of Psychological Intervention in the Criminal Justice System. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Week 12 Nov. 23 EMERGING CONTROVERSIES & CONCLUSIONS
* * * WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT DUE * * *
Required readings:
Petrila, John (2009), Finding common ground between scientific psychology and the law. In: Psychological Science in the Courtroom: Consensus and Controversy, Chapter 17, pp. 387-407.
Janus, E. S. (2004). Sexually violent predator laws: Psychiatry in service to a morally dubious enterprise. Lancet, 364, 50-52.
Petrila, J. (2008). Because they do horrible things: Fear, science, and the erosion of civil liberties in sexually violent predator proceedings. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 36 (359-387).
Gold, S., & Romney, L. (2007 November). Turmoil replaces treatment at Coalinga hospital: A state facility meant for sexually violent predators gets low marks after two years. Los Angeles Times.
REPORT: Gerold Departey (SVP)
Supplementary readings:
Zander, T.K. (2005). Civil commitment without psychosis: The law's reliance on the weakest links in psychodiagnosis. Journal of Sex Offender Civil Commitment: Science and the Law, 1, 17-82. TOO LONG???
Berlin, F.S., Galbreath, N.W., & Geary, B. (2003). The Use of Actuarials at Civil Commitment Hearings to Predict the Likelihood of Future Sexual Violence. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 377-382.
Rogers, Richard and Rebecca L. Jackson, "Sexually Violent Predators: The risky enterprise of risk assessment," Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & Law 33: 523-528 (2005).
"Pariah". (2006). Sexual Fascism in Progressive America: Scapegoats and Shunning. CounterPunch.
Franklin, K. (2007). Invasion of the hebephile hunters: Or, the story of how an archaic word got a new lease on life. Available online at: http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/search?q=hebephilia
Week 13 November 30 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS
Week 14 Dec. 7 STUDENT PRESENTATIONS
Week 15 Dec. 14 TBA 13 PSY8565 Course Information Form
LEGAL OBSERVATION DATA SHEET
Attach as face sheet to typewritten assignment
__ Name
Date(s) of observation
Times of observation
Courthouse
Courtroom(s)
Name(s) of judge(s)
Extra-credit interviews
Types of proceedings observed
Other data